Returning to Blogging…and Moving to WordPress

After an almost two-year hiatus from blogging here, I have decided to return to blogging and an internet presence devoted to enterprise & data architecture, with a good dose of project managment thrown in. As part of that process, I…

Categories Uncategorized

Business Function: Does it still have a place in Business Architecture?

Capability modelling has become something of a de facto standard within contemporary Enterprise Architecture practice. Capability-based planning is also a proven tool when it comes to change portfolio management and the development of strategic roadmaps. […]

The post Business Function: Does it still have a place in Business Architecture? appeared first on Enterprise Architects.

Architecture is simple

What is architecture? What do we do in architecture? And how do we do it? Turns out that it’s essentially the same for every kind of architecture: enterprise-architecture, solutions-architecture, software-architecture, building-architecture, naval-architecture, brand-architecture, whatever. Right down at the root, in principle, architecture is incredibly simple. It all

The Open Group Summit Amsterdam – ArchiMate® Day – May 14, 2014

By Andrew Josey, Director of Standards, The Open Group The Open Group Summit 2014 Amsterdam features an all day track on the ArchiMate® modeling language, followed by an ArchiMate Users Group meeting in the evening. The meeting attendees include the … Continue reading

Are You Fighting for Your Users?

It has been noted many times that there are only two industries that refer to their customers as “users”: IT and illegal drugs. When you think about it – at some point both of them need a fix! (ba-dum-bump) Thank you! I’ll be he…

Categories Uncategorized

The Value of Reference Architectures

In my previous blog post I wrote about value-driven enterprise architecture and its relations to different disciplines within the enterprise. In this blog, I want to focus on the added value of using reference architectures.

What are reference architectures?

Reference architectures are standardized architectures that provide a frame of reference for a particular domain, sector or field of interest. Reference models or architectures provide a common vocabulary, reusable designs and industry best practices. They are not solution architectures, i.e., they are not implemented directly. Rather, they are used as a constraint for more concrete architectures. Typically, a reference architecture includes common architecture principles, patterns, building blocks and standards.

Many domains have defined their own reference architectures. Well-known examples include:

  • the BIAN service landscape for the banking industry;

  • the ACORD Framework for the insurance industry;

  • the eTOM business process framework for the telecommunications industry from the TMforum;

  • various government reference architectures, for example the Dutch NORA and her ‘daughters’, the US FEAF or the Australian AGA;

  • the defense architecture frameworks such as NAF, DODAF and MoDAF;

  • reference architectures for manufacturing and supply chains such as ISA-95 and SCOR.

Most of these architectures include the common business functions/capabilities and business processes in a domain. Next to that, they may include for example common data models, communication standards and exchange formats, and sometimes even common software building blocks and other reusable assets.

eTOM framework in ArchiMate

Why use reference architectures?

So what is the value of using such reference architectures, and why and when should you employ them?

First of all, reference architectures provide a frame of reference that helps you to get an overview of a particular domain and they provide a starting point for your own enterprise architecture effort. They provide you with basic structures so you do not have to reinvent the wheel (which often turns out to be square anyway). Reference architectures are most valuable for those aspects and elements of your organization on which you do not compete with others.

For example, the business functions of a typical insurance company are largely similar to those of its competitors, as are many of its business processes. Competitive differences will most likely be in its products, pricing, customer segments, and customer relationships. Reusing industry best practices provided by reference architectures ensures that you are not behind the curve on these non-competitive aspects. We also see this in the implementation of many IT systems, where vendors such as SAP provide reference processes for large parts of an organization. Your accounting process, for example, is seldom a competitive advantage.

A second reason for using reference architectures is interoperability. In our increasingly networked world, organizations need to connect and cooperate with all manner of other parties. The standards and building blocks provided by reference architectures facilitate these connections. A related benefit is that using standards improves flexibility, because it is easier to exchange building blocks that connect via standardized interfaces; vice versa, it is much easier to develop standards if the building blocks themselves are standardized. LEGO is a perfect example, as my colleague Bas van Gils described in his blog recently.

This then brings us to a third reason for using reference architectures: mergers & acquisitions and outsourcing. If two parties speak the same language, use the same standards, and recognize the same boundaries between functions, processes and/or systems, it will be much easier to recombine their elements in new ways.

A fourth reason for using reference architectures is to facilitate benchmarking within your industry. Often, the differences between companies are not in the design of e.g. their business processes, but in their execution. Using reference designs makes it much easier to compare those execution results.

Benchmarking leads us to a fifth reason why reference architectures are important: regulatory compliance. Often, reference architectures are prescribed (or at least strongly recommended) by regulators. Accounting principles, practices and processes, for example, are evermore standardized and mandated. This leads to business reporting standards, even down to the level of exchange standards such as XBRL.

Another example is given by the Wijffels committee on the structure of Dutch banks, installed by the Ministry of Finance and the Dutch National Bank at the request of the Dutch Parliament. They have published a report which explicitly recommends banks to use industry standards such as BIAN. The context of this report is the need for decommissioning and breaking up banks in case of financial disaster (the so-called ‘living wills’). Structuring a bank along the lines of a reference architecture such as BIAN’s may certainly help in such a case. These issues are also addressed by the Dodd-Frank Act in the US and the new ECB Resolution Mechanism in the EU, so we may expect similar guidance from those sources.

How to use reference architectures?

Before you decide to use a reference architecture, some conditions should be fulfilled. First of all, a reference architecture should be community-based. Users, not vendors, should decide on best practices, and the architecture should be actively maintained by the user community. The world changes, and so should your reference architectures.

Such an active and open community process is ideally complemented by the use of open standards in describing the architectures. For example, the descriptions of the Dutch government reference architectures are largely based on the ArchiMate standard. BiZZdesign can provide many such reference architecture models out-of-the box.

The use of a reference architecture in an organization also requires governance: the organization should really commit to its use and this should be ‘enforced’ in some way. Reference architectures are only of value if people are really using them as intended and actually follow their guidance, otherwise the whole idea of reusing industry best practices breaks down.

Finally, your reference architecture of choice should provide true, actionable guidance. General architecture principles are not enough. Actual structure, for example in terms of business functions or processes, building blocks and standards, is needed to provide you with a useful backbone for your own architecture efforts.

Using reference architectures does not imply that you lose all your design freedom. Rather, you focus that freedom on those aspects of your enterprise where you make a real difference. That is where you as an architect can add the most value!

Categories Uncategorized

Aligning the Infrastructure Architecture with the Systems Application Architecture

Earlier this year we launched a new team within IT Services: the Technical Architecture Virtual Team. I lead this team, reporting via the Assistant Director of IT Services for Services Development (the team’s Sponsor) to the Senior Management Team. The team is made up of a small number of technical experts within the department, representing […]

Aligning the Infrastructure Architecture with the Systems Application Architecture

Earlier this year we launched a new team within IT Services: the Technical Architecture Virtual Team. I lead this team, reporting via the Assistant Director of IT Services for Services Development (the team’s Sponsor) to the Senior Management Team. The team is made up of a small number of technical experts within the department, representing […]

The Future of Housing Tech Roundtable

image

On Tuesday 22nd a group of people interested in tech in Housing gathered together at a roundtable faciliated and arranged by HACT and hosted by Paul Foster at Microsoft.

It was a really interesting session. I did a couple of presentations based on my recent posts here and here to seed different parts of the debate, which I think worked ok, although as i hadn’t had as much time as i’d have liked to prep i think i probably waffled a bit too much 🙁

Anyway, this post is intended to capture some thoughts from the day.

These will focus around the following areas:

  • People
  • Suppliers
  • Data
  • Platforms and Services
  • Manifesto

People

image

I find it easy to fall into the trap of being overly sceptical and pessimistic about #ukhousing its lack of innovation, its intertia etc. but roundtables like the one we had are a great antidote to that where you get the opportunity to talk to bright, intelligent, experienced individuals who are really switched on to their challenges and those of their business.

Suppliers

image

I don’t think we got too hung up on incumbent bashing, but there was a justified amount of this, although it was rightly tempered I think with an acceptance that ‘customers get the suppliers they deserve’. There is more as individuals and as a community that we can do to get the most value out of our existing suppliers as well as look to other opportunities outside the traditional #ukhousing pond.

Data

image

Data was a common theme amongst the discussions. A couple of key points stuck in my mind:

  • The recognition that data is the lifeblood of an organisation and the crucial (but not sole) role that IT/Tech plays in unlocking its value.
  • The desire to de-silo data, to share it more freely and to mash it up with other existing or new data sources.
  • The difficulty of working within the current similar information system architectures that those round the table shared, often related to issues with supplier technology, sometimes even contractual issues. this really re-enforced for me the view that our ambitions as housing orgs are sometimes being constrained rather than enabled by those we choose to partner with.

Platforms and services

image

There seemed to be a consensus that whilst we ‘do all do the same things’ the individual shape of housing orgs can be different e.g. student housing, leisure centre management, telecare.

I think there was a consensus that the monoliths of the current/past are not fit and that a more flexible architecture where element are composable to reflect the nature of the organisation is the way ahead.

I think in writing about a Platform in my recent blog posts I might have given the impression that i was talking about some monolithic beast. I was not. My thinking in this space is very much informed by this great post on ‘Micro Services’ by Martin Fowler (hey i’m an Enterprise Architect I can’t go a whole post without referring to a buzzword!). just as an ideal housing org’s business should be oriented around the service it delivers to its customers, so should its ideal information systems architecture.

Manifesto

Towards the end of the roundtable we touched on the idea of coalescing some of our discussion, our frustration, our aspirations and principles into a document, I think i mentioned the ‘M’ word, but it doesn’t have to be a manifesto, as an Enterprise Architect i’d view it as a collection of architecture principles that clarify what we want a housing technologists. What do we need? what will we not put up with?

I see this manifesto having two important uses:

1)

Imagine if a large enough portion of the housing community agreed with, helped improve and signed up to the manifesto? What a great statement of intent to deliver to suppliers to the sector! we would immediately be raising the bar of expectation across the sector.

I find it ironic that, as a sector that seems to spend half its energy chasing some sector/regulator/government standard that we haven’t had the same focus on standards within the technology layer in the organisation.

2)

If the #ukhousing community did ever want to do something innovative ‘by themselves, for themselves’ then what a great starting point the manifesto would be? essentially encapsulating the design principles for any initiative.

As to what the manifesto might contain? that will have to wait for another post.

Conclusion

This is just a snapshot (although longer than i intended) on the roundtable. I’ve missed loads including Lucy Glenday from Surrey CC Skyping in to talk about the omni-channel platform that they are building. There are plans for future ones focused around the manifesto. I’d urge those that are interested and those that couldn’t make it to get involved.

I’ll be running a session on the future of housing tech at House Party so please pop along if any of this post has interested you. Hopefully it will be fun and involve making prototypes of peoples vision for housing tech in the future (it might involve cardboard boxes and string(!?) if i can stop writing blog posts and start planning it :))

Also feel free to get in touch, always happy to chat about, well, pretty much anything 🙂